Wouldn't you have to prove bigfoot exists before you can look for subspecies?

Belief bias occurs when we make illogical conclusions in order to confirm our preexisting beliefs. Belief perseverance refers to our tendency to maintain a belief even after the evidence we used to form the belief is contradicted.

Considering that Bigfoot enthusiasts have displayed a huge range of completely different footprint casts and descriptions that range from around 5 feet (touted to be juvenile) to 10 feet in height and colors from blond, red, brown, black, and even green (as if moss was growing in it's fur) I'd guess that Bigfoot believers would have to say there were different species.

-DFB

Subject: I have a black cat.
Believer: Black cats are bad luck.
Non-believer: It's just a cat.
Crackpot: Black cats are part of the New World Order government conspiracy.
Skeptic: I can test if black cats are more or less lucky than another cat.
Cynic: You only have a black cat to gain power and prestige.

`I myself believe that IF they do indeed exist, the Bigfoot of the northeast and the Skunk ape of the southeast are two separate species . The supposed tracks found by Harlan Ford as well as those found in the 1969 Chilton County Alabama sightings are nothing at all like a " sasquatch " print is supposed to look. There are also a lot more reports of violence from the southeast version . I think they are different entirely . Of course the Skunk ape could just be Bigfoots redneck little cousin
....